Posted on 03/20/2024 6:10:31 AM PDT by Red Badger
Hours after the Supreme Court gave Texas officials permission to jail and prosecute migrants suspected of crossing the U.S. southern border without authorization, an appeals court late Tuesday blocked the state from enforcing its controversial immigration law known as SB4.
In a late-night order, a 5th Circuit Court of Appeals panel dissolved a pause that it issued in early March to suspend a lower court ruling that found SB4 to be unconstitutional.
The order reinstated a ruling from U.S. District Court Judge David Ezra, who concluded in late February that SB4 conflicted with federal immigration laws and the Constitution.
Earlier on Tuesday, the Supreme Court denied a request from the Justice Department to void the initial 5th Circuit order that had paused Ezra's ruling. The high court allowed SB4 to take effect for several hours, though it's unclear whether Texas arrested any migrants under the law during that short time span.
Ezra's order blocking SB4 will stay in place until the 5th Circuit rules on Texas' request to allow the law to be enforced while the appeals court considers its legality. A virtual hearing on that question is scheduled for Wednesday morning.
Passed by the Texas legislature last year, SB4 criminalizes unauthorized migration at the state level, making the act of entering the U.S. outside of a port of entry — already a federal offense — into a state crime. It also creates a state felony charge for illegal reentry.
SB4 empowers law enforcement officials in Texas, at the state and local level, to detain and prosecute migrants on these new criminal charges. It also grants state judges the power to require migrants to return to Mexico as an alternative to prosecution.
The Justice Department has said SB4 conflicts with federal law and the Constitution, noting that immigration enforcement, including arrests and deportations, have long been a federal responsibility. It has also argued the measure harms relations with the Mexican government, which has denounced SB4 as "anti-immigrant" and vowed to reject migrants returned by the state of Texas.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who has positioned himself as the leading state critic of President Biden's border policies, has portrayed SB4 as a necessary measure to discourage migrants from crossing the Rio Grande, arguing the federal government has not done enough to deter illegal immigration.
Over the past three years, Texas has mounted the most aggressive state effort yet to challenge the federal government's power over immigration policy, busing tens of thousands of migrants to major, Democratic-led cities, assembling razor wire and buoys along stretches of the border to deter migrant crossings and filing multiple lawsuits against federal immigration programs.
“Time to defund all Feral courts. All of them.”
Circuit boundaries might be adjusted.
Governments such as that of Texas might be given judge selection power - Judges A, C, F, K, L, S and U shall have power to hear cases involving our jurisdiction. Austin might then choose Judges A, K and U.
Then there is the matter of court security. But it’s our compensation. Kindly talk to this IRS agent here.
How in the hell can SB4 “conflict” with “Federal immigration laws” when there aren’t any “Federal immigration laws” anymore. “Immigration” is a friggin’ Old West saloon free for all run by the Dung Beetle Party’s voter registration department. Show me one Federal Immigration law. THERE ISN’T ANY!!!!
Ignore this ruling.
L
Go with SCOTUS, ignore the fifth circus.
BTW, Appointed by: Ronald Reagan
I knew I remembered this meathead. He’s one of Hawaii’s grass skirt hula hula aloha boyz. Real goofball.
We deserve a judge who is Better Than Ezra.
Article 3, Section 1 “...compensation, which shall not be diminished...”
Huh ?
This is about illegal entry, not naturalization or immigration.
Methinks GWB put the capstone on the dishonest conflation of the two by our so called elites when he established the eerily Fascistic sounding Department of Homeland Security.
So Ezra was designated by the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. A judge from Hawaii with jurisdiction in San Antonio. WTF? This is like a game of charades.
Perhaps civil law defendants & plaintiffs should be able to get judge blocks just like criminal law defendants get juror blocks.
The Supremes sent it back to the lower court...for them to rule on it...then it will go back the Supremes.
Exactly!
The US Judicial Branch has assumed the throne and we no longer need the Legislative or Executive Branch ... oh, except for Biden who just ignores any Judicial ruling he doesn’t like.
So why ask Mexico to “accept” repatriations? Round up the illegals, reform them into foot caravans like when they arrive, and force them to walk back the way they came. If they refuse to move their feet in the right direction, load them onto trucks, drive them into Mexico, and dump them. Keep this up until Mexico builds a wall.
“illegal entry”
States have an absolute right under our constitution to fend off invasions and to obtain federal help in doing so.
And it is an invasion even though most of the invaders are unarmed.
Finally....
One that has teeth.
A minor re-wording should do the trick.
Instead of arrest (why would Texas want to detain hundreds of thousands in their prison system) transport to the nearest federal facility.
Cloward-Piven.
Overwhelm the system.
Take them to international waters off their homelands and pay fishermen to take them to shore.
If the invaders don’t agree, put lifejackets on them, $50 each in their pockets and toss them overboard.
I’ve never understood the logic behind a superior court “remanding” an improper decision back to the court which made the improper decision to begin with.
That’s like telling a misbehaving child to punish himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.